This is actually a really bad analogy here. You are implying that either win98 (with its lovely memory leak) or firestarter doesn't work, which is utterly untrue.

Fair enough, but actually my intent was to imply that Win98 isn't stable (I actually wasn't commenting on Firestarter at all), which is what the Pro-XP'ers on here are implying, that we should all upgrade to 2K/XP because it's more stable.

You are also implying that win98 and XP are the same, which they are not

Architecturally speaking, yes I am. Like I said they are both 32bit OS's running on x86 hardware.

Perhaps the way I worded it was confusing, I do realize that XP/2K is built upon the NT core, whereas 98 was built from the 95 core, so the two are completely different in the sense they are totally separate software projects. They both however still run 32bit Windows apps the same.

I don't think that one $100 upgrade

My figures were Canadian $$$'s, so no, for me it wouldn't be less than $100 (even with the Canadian dollar being so strong as of late)

but I don't think that one ... upgrade ... in 6 years is unfair here.

No dor I, if it brings with it value. The only value I see in XP over 98 is increased stability. Everything else in XP (from my perspective) is fluff, fluff which I don't think is worth the $100+ for the upgrade. And like I said, I don't think stability is something that we should be required to upgrade to get, it should come with the product.

Look at it this way, if Id puts out Doom 3 and it's buggier than hell, but they address these bugs in an paid expansion pack, would you not have a problem? Would you not have the expectation that as a paid customer of Doom 3 that any bugs should be fixed free of charge to you? Why is Windows any different?

There will always be people like you, refusing to upgrade and making game companies take longer to develop products for the rest of us

So IOW, my decision not to use XP on my gaming machine is adversely affecting you, so I should then upgrade? Uhm, no. The console market will always be easier to develop for, not only because of the variety of OS's (Wintel vs Mac vs Linux), but also the variety of hardware (ATI vs NVidia, etc etc). This is fundamental to the PC world, and while it's its greatest strength (unlimited capabilities, hardware/software can grow to meet new needs), it is simultaneously the biggest obstacle that developers (particularly game developers) face (non-standardized platform).

how long do you really expect win98 support to last?

In terms of bug fixes/stability/security issues, for as long as MS is around. The unfortunate thing is that software doesn't come with warranties, so this isn't realistic in the current software world.

Your system has stability and speed....fine; just don't expect to be able to play the latest and greatest games for long

But that's the point, that 98 doesn't have the stability of XP (in fact, XP's biggest selling point was the increased stability of the NT core). And if it means I can't play the latest & greatest, I'm willing to accept that (for now, largely because I can't play the latest & greatest anyways due to hardware limitations).

Anyways, I have to go write my exam.

PZ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Currently Reading: J.R.R. Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings: Return of the King" -- Last Read: Kenneth Lux's "Adam Smith's Mistake: How a Moral Philosopher Invented Economics This comment was edited on Dec 9, 13:33.